Comments about ‘My View: Violence tax would dilute problems’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Jan. 15 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
John Charity Spring
Back Home in Davis County, UT

This article is absolutely correct about modern Hollywood's relentless promotion of violence as a recreational activity. Indeed, it is a part of a deliberate attack on traditional American morality. However, this article does not go far enough. Instead of merely being taxed, these ultra-violent productions should be banned.

The left wing claims that the First Amendment protects their right to make these violent shows. This is nonsense. From the beginning, the Supreme Court has ruled that a State can outlaw speech which incites violence. That is exactly what these shows are.

In short, our legislature must have the courage to do what is right to protect society from violence. Ban these shows immediately before more innocent school children are massacred.

pragmatistferlife
salt lake city, utah

Personally I'm not opposed to the conversation proposed by the writer. It's a pretty tricky one in terms of what is the violence to be taxed? Video games that promote murder, or football? Taxing tobacco and alcohol is pretty simple, and yet even that has controversy. Still this is one of the traditional uses of taxes..to discourage or encourage given behaviors for the good of society.

What I do object to is the immediate jump JCS makes to "left wing"...and then the flight of logic that banning these pieces of media will prevent the killing of more school children. School children were killed long before computers and even long before tv. By the way what is "left wing"?

JohnH
Cedar City, UT

I'm wondering how much the "violence tax" would be on the sale of a bible. There sure is a lot of violence, death, and destruction in that baby!

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

Why do Conservatives love their freedom limiting "Sin Taxes."

This could levy a hefty tax on religious books or is reading about violence ok?

What about sex (real or suggested) in media, that shouldn't escape a "societal sin tax."

News medias showing violence should be double taxed because it's reality and more disturbing.

Another attempt to distract people from the fact that the NRA wants everyone (lunatics too, since some of there most ardent supporters sound like lunatics) to have a warm gun, because nothing has changed for over 200 years and a baar might get you.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

There have always been "mockers" who think it is funny to revile the Constitution or any other document that limits the power of government. They think that government is put on earth to limit the people.

They ignore the profound words of the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,"

Our creator, not government, endowed us with unalienable Rights. The people, not the government, determines the limits of the government's authority.

The people, not the NRA and certainly not the government, defined our right to keep and bear arms.

There are always those who want to tax SOMEBODY else to control SOMEBODY else. A violence tax is a crackpot idea because it depends on a taxing authority to define "violence". You can bet that that authority would never consider it violent to stick their fingers in your wallet and take your money by force..

Screwdriver
Casa Grande, AZ

@Mike "The people, not the NRA and certainly not the government,"

There you go Mike, you think the government is not the same thing as the people.

So why even talk about the constitution since to you we don't have a republic, democracy or anything else defined by self-governace?

You only agree with our government when you get your way. Sorry that's not what democracy means.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments